Hey, look at that, water burns!

Jstas

http://www.livescience.com/environment/070911_ap_salt_water.html

That's for real. I guess maybe that "car that runs on water" hasn't really been hidden by the government and oil companies for so long. Most likely because it never existed.

Whoda thunk? A possible cure for cancer could be the answer to teh question "What happens when the oil runs out?"

brettw22

Cool.......wonder how salt water will affect the inside of an engine.........

66chevyIISS

What happens when the oceans dry up?

bobman1235

brettw22 wrote: »

Cool.......wonder how salt water will affect the inside of an engine.........

I'm pretty sure the engines would be redesigned, so not much of a concern yet

Really neat discovery though.

bradm6406

That's very cool.

I'm curious though, how much energy it takes to create the radio frequencies required to break apart the molecules in the salt water. If you need more energy to create those radio frequencies than what you gain when you burn the hydrogen then it's not a very efficient way to run a car (big batteries so you can burn water... might as well run off the big batteries). But if you can generate enough energy from burning the hydrogen to be able to run an engine and keep the frequency generator going then that will be incredible.


Brad

66chevyIISS

Same theory could be used for Recycling too. We use big diesel running dump trucks to pick up recycle, then we use big machines that use a ton of energy to crush, and compact the recycle. Kind of ironic.

Jstas

brettw22 wrote: »

Cool.......wonder how salt water will affect the inside of an engine.........

The article says that the RF waves release hydrogen and that is what's actually burning. You don't really need to run saltwater through your engine.

Besides, water is a liquid and a liquid cannot be compressed. A conventional internal combustion engine of any kind requires the compression of the air/fuel mixture to make power. The fuel is atomized and it can be compressed like a gas because the particulates are so small and the ratio is usually 14 parts air to 1 part fuel. You can support several BAR of compression before the ratio becomes a problem.

However, for the engine use saltwater, the IC design will not work and it needs to be completely redesigned.

edbert

My guess is to use this type of technology, you would have gas to start the engine and get some power to I would assume a fairly large alternator and a few deep cycle batteries so that all the power would not be going to produce the RF. Just a thought.

Jstas

bradm6406 wrote: »

That's very cool.

I'm curious though, how much energy it takes to create the radio frequencies required to break apart the molecules in the salt water. If you need more energy to create those radio frequencies than what you gain when you burn the hydrogen then it's not a very efficient way to run a car (big batteries so you can burn water... might as well run off the big batteries). But if you can generate enough energy from burning the hydrogen to be able to run an engine and keep the frequency generator going then that will be incredible.


Brad

I would think that it would honestly be a tad too cumbersome for a car and the technology would be used to generate power in a more central location as a power plant.

The biggest deal about electric and hybrid cars is that the end user might see the benefits first hand but the benefits are offset by the increases required in the production of the car and the production of the power the car needs to tap from the power grid to work.

If they can honestly burn the hydrogen out of sea water, then the only by products would be oxygen and whatever minerals and impurities are in the water. The hydrogen holds a pretty high level of energy in the bonds and the fuel source is pretty much unlimited. Also, the waste from the process is essentially raw materials that can be used elsewhere. It has a low environmental impact and it'll still generate power.

Music Joe

66chevyIISS wrote: »

Same theory could be used for Recycling too. We use big diesel running dump trucks to pick up recycle, then we use big machines that use a ton of energy to crush, and compact the recycle. Kind of ironic.

Added to that is in many places 3 trucks are now required to service each home.
2 extra drivers per route plus their transpo to and from work.
+ people hired to work the seperated waste conveyors double screening blue cart waste and their vehicles to get them to work and back.
3 carts made of oil product vs 1 at each home.

Of course the bill is much higher, so we drive more to make more.

mrbigbluelight

Remember, TANSTAAFL.

"The radio frequencies act to weaken the bonds between the elements that make up salt water, releasing the hydrogen, Roy said. Once ignited, the hydrogen will burn as long as it is exposed to the frequencies, he said. "

No, once hydrogen is freed from any bonds, it will burn, period.
"As long as it is exposed to the frequencies" ? Incorrect.

And there is no way on earth that we'll ever pull up the pump, fill the tank with seawater, and proceed on our merry way.

Anyone who's been around a desalination plant is aware that there's huge amounts of minerals contained in the seawater.
A large-scale, commercial seawater plant designed to extract hydrogen would, I believe, have the enormous problem of what do you do with the residual minerals that are a byproduct of the process.
Can't put them in a landfill.
Dump them back into the ocean ? Long term, this would increase the mineral concentration in the ocean near the shore, unless one plans on filling tankers with the concentrated water and dumping it way off shore.

Someone needs to conquer the problem of electrical storage, with the ability to rapidly recharge a portable storage unit.

Where's Tesla when you need him.

audiobliss

So, what happens if you're jamming to some good tunes on your new yacht out in the middle of the ocean and start playing these radio waves?

Wow, would that ever be one huge fire!

Jstas

mrbigbluelight wrote: »

Remember, TANSTAAFL.

"The radio frequencies act to weaken the bonds between the elements that make up salt water, releasing the hydrogen, Roy said. Once ignited, the hydrogen will burn as long as it is exposed to the frequencies, he said. "

No, once hydrogen is freed from any bonds, it will burn, period.
"As long as it is exposed to the frequencies" ? Incorrect.

And there is no way on earth that we'll ever pull up the pump, fill the tank with seawater, and proceed on our merry way.

Anyone who's been around a desalination plant is aware that there's huge amounts of minerals contained in the seawater.
A large-scale, commercial seawater plant designed to extract hydrogen would, I believe, have the enormous problem of what do you do with the residual minerals that are a byproduct of the process.
Can't put them in a landfill.
Dump them back into the ocean ? Long term, this would increase the mineral concentration in the ocean near the shore, unless one plans on filling tankers with the concentrated water and dumping it way off shore.

Someone needs to conquer the problem of electrical storage, with the ability to rapidly recharge a portable storage unit.

Where's Tesla when you need him.

Wow, you need to lighten up.

It's new technology dude, of course it's going to have teething problems before it can be applied somewhere.

On top of that, you are going on about how hydrogen burns once it is freed from any bonds. Well, to be more accurate, it oxidizes. That's essentially what burning is, rapid oxidation. However, I have yet to see sea water spontaneously combust. I've spent a large chunk of time on the ocean too and I would think I would have seen something like that by now.

The article states that the hydrogen in question is released when the bonds are weakened by the radio frequencies. Normally, hydrogen clings on to oxygen for dear life and it's quite stable. Therefore, it takes the radio frequencies to release the hydrogen. Once the hydrogen is released it then oxidizes. If the radio frequencies stop, the hydrogen stops being released and therefore, stops burning cause it's bonds become stable once again. It is an accurate statement.

You quoted the statement yourself and you are demanding a level of accuracy from the article that you have refused to adhere to yourself. What is even further inaccurate about your statements is that the article is entirely correct in the statements and you are harping on an issue that doesn't even exist.

Lighten up dude. You're not the only person out there that passed high school chemistry. What bug crawled up your **** anyway? It's just an article and people are discussing it. What's wrong with that?

As far as your questions about the waste products of the process, the minerals contained in seawater are already prevalent in many applications from consumer level products like table salt to manufacturing processes and even electronics. There are places to use it.

BTW, in case you haven't noticed, Tesla is dead. Has been for some time.